INTL Russia Doubling Nuclear Warheads: New multiple-warhead missiles to break arms treaty limit

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-doubling-nuclear-warheads/

Russia Doubling Nuclear Warheads

New multiple-warhead missiles to break arms treaty limit

BY: Bill Gertz
April 1, 2016 5:00 am

Russia is doubling the number of its strategic nuclear warheads on new missiles by deploying multiple reentry vehicles that have put Moscow over the limit set by the New START arms treaty, according to Pentagon officials.

A recent intelligence assessment of the Russian strategic warhead buildup shows that the increase is the result of the addition of multiple, independently targetable reentry vehicles, or MIRVs, on recently deployed road-mobile SS-27 and submarine-launched SS-N-32 missiles, said officials familiar with reports of the buildup.

“The Russians are doubling their warhead output,” said one official. “They will be exceeding the New START [arms treaty] levels because of MIRVing these new systems.”

The 2010 treaty requires the United States and Russia to reduce deployed warheads to 1,550 warheads by February 2018.

The United States has cut its warhead stockpiles significantly in recent years. Moscow, however, has increased its numbers of deployed warheads and new weapons.

The State Department revealed in January that Russia currently has exceeded the New START warhead limit by 98 warheads, deploying a total number of 1,648 warheads. The U.S. level currently is below the treaty level at 1,538 warheads.

Officials said that in addition to adding warheads to the new missiles, Russian officials have sought to prevent U.S. weapons inspectors from checking warheads as part of the 2010 treaty.

The State Department, however, said it can inspect the new MIRVed missiles.
Disclosure of the doubling of Moscow’s warhead force comes as world leaders gather in Washington this week to discus nuclear security—but without Russian President Vladimir Putin, who skipped the conclave in an apparent snub of the United States.

The Nuclear Security Summit is the latest meeting of world leaders seeking to pursue President Obama’s 2009 declaration of a world without nuclear arms.
Russia, however, is embarked on a major strategic nuclear forces build-up under Putin. Moscow is building new road-mobile, rail-mobile, and silo-based intercontinental-range missiles, along with new submarines equipped with modernized missiles. A new long-range bomber is also being built.

SS-N 30
“Russia’s modernization program and their nuclear deterrent force is of concern,” Adm. Cecil Haney, commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, which is in charge of nuclear forces, told Congress March 10.

“When you look at what they’ve been modernizing, it didn’t just start,” Haney said. “They’ve been doing this quite frankly for some time with a lot of crescendo of activity over the last decade and a half.”

By contrast, the Pentagon is scrambling to find funds to pay for modernizing aging U.S. nuclear forces after seven years of sharp defense spending cuts under Obama.
Earlier this month, Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Congress that Russia continues to pose the greatest threat to the United States.

“The one that has the greatest capability and poses the greatest threat to the United States is Russia because of its capabilities—its nuclear capability, its cyber capability, and clearly because of some of the things we have seen in its leadership behavior over the last couple of years,” Dunford said.

In addition to a large-scale nuclear buildup, Russia has upgraded its nuclear doctrine and its leaders and officials have issued numerous threats to use nuclear arms against the United States in recent months, compounding fears of a renewed Russian threat.

Blake Narendra, spokesman for the State Department’s arms control, verification, and compliance bureau, said the Russian warhead build-up is the result of normal fluctuations due to modernization prior to the compliance deadline.

“The Treaty has no interim limits,” Narendra told the Free Beacon. “We fully expect Russia to meet the New START treaty central limits in accordance with the stipulated timeline of February 2018. The treaty provides that by that date both sides must have no more than 700 deployed treaty-limited delivery vehicles and 1,550 deployed warheads.”

Both the United States and Russia continue to implement the treaty in “a business-like manner,” he added.

Mark Schneider, a former Pentagon official involved in strategic nuclear forces, however, said he has warned for years that Russia is not reducing its nuclear forces under the treaty.

Since the New START arms accord, Moscow has eliminated small numbers of older SS-25 road-mobile missiles. But the missiles were replaced with new multiple-warhead SS-27s.

SS-27 Mod 2
“The Russians have not claimed to have made any reductions for five years,” Schneider said

Additionally, Russian officials deceptively sought to make it appear their nuclear forces have been reduced during a recent nuclear review conference.

“If they could have claimed to have made any reductions under New START counting rules they would have done it there,” Schneider said.

The Obama administration also has been deceptive about the benefits of New START.
“The administration public affairs talking points on New START reductions border on outright lies,” Schneider said.

“The only reductions that have been made since New START entry into force have been by the United States,” he said. “Instead, Russia has moved from below the New START limits to above the New START limits in deployed warheads and deployed delivery vehicles.”

Deployment of new multiple-warhead SS-27s and SS-N-32s are pushing up the Russian warhead numbers. Published Russian reports have stated the missiles will be armed with 10 warheads each.

Former Defense Secretary William Perry said Thursday that New START was “very helpful” in promoting strategic stability but that recent trends in nuclear weapons are “very, very bad.”

“When President Obama made his speech in Prague, I thought we were really set for major progress in this field [disarmament],” Perry said in remarks at the Atlantic Council.

However, Russian “hostility” to the United States ended the progress. “Everything came to a grinding halt and we’re moving in reverse,” Perry said.

Other nuclear powers that are expanding their arsenals include China and Pakistan, Perry said.

Perry urged further engagement with Russia on nuclear weapons. “We do have a common interest in preventing a nuclear catastrophe,” he said.

Perry is advocating that the United States unilaterally eliminate all its land-based missiles and rely instead on nuclear missile submarines and bombers for deterrence.
However, he said his advocacy of the policy “may be pursuing a mission impossible.”

“I highly doubt the Russians would follow suit” by eliminating their land-based missiles, the former secretary said.

Additionally, Moscow is building a new heavy ICBM called Sarmat, code-named SS-X-30 by the Pentagon, that will be equipped with between 10 and 15 warheads per missile. And a new rail-based ICBM is being developed that will also carry multiple warheads.

Another long-range missile, called the SS-X-31, is under development and will carry up to 12 warheads.

Schneider, the former Pentagon official, said senior Russian arms officials have been quoted in press reports discussing Moscow’s withdrawal from the New START arms accord. If that takes place, Russia will have had six and a half years to prepare to violate the treaty limits, at the same time the United States will have reduced its forces to treaty limits.

“Can they comply with New START? Yes. They can download their missile warheads and do a small number to delivery systems reductions,” Schneider said. “Will they? I doubt it. If they don’t start to do something very soon they are likely to pull the plug on the treaty. I don’t see them uploading the way they have, only to download in the next two years.”

The White House said Moscow’s failure to take part in the nuclear summit was a sign of self-isolation based on the West’s sanctions aimed at punishing Russia for the military takeover of Ukraine’s Crimea.

A Russian official said the snub by Putin was directed at Obama.

“This summit is particularly important for the USA and for Obama—this is probably why Moscow has decided to go for this gesture and show its outrage with the West’s policy in this manner,” Alexei Arbatov, director of the Center for International Security at the Russian Academy of Sciences, told the business newspaper Vedomosti.

A Russian Foreign Ministry official, Mikhail Ulyanov, told RIA Novosti that the summit was not needed.

“There is no need for it, to be honest,” he said, adding that nuclear security talks should be the work of nuclear physicists, intelligence services, and engineers.

“The political agenda of the summits has long been exhausted,” Ulyanov said.

Video
 

Dozdoats

On TB every waking moment
New multiple-warhead missiles to break arms treaty limit

AND WHO IS GOING TO ACTUALLY DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT?

Welcome back to a multipolar world, folks. A multipolar world in which the FUSA is not necessarily top dog - and might never be again.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
New multiple-warhead missiles to break arms treaty limit

AND WHO IS GOING TO ACTUALLY DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT?

Welcome back to a multipolar world, folks. A multipolar world in which the FUSA is not necessarily top dog - and might never be again.

And recall Putin didn't come to town for that nuclear conference. Likelier than not he saw it for the waste of time it was. And on that note, IMHO most of those Russian nukes aren't meant for the US or Europe but for China and the Islamic World; no body else is a physical invasion threat to the Rodina.
 

KKC

Veteran Member
And recall Putin didn't come to town for that nuclear conference. Likelier than not he saw it for the waste of time it was. And on that note, IMHO most of those Russian nukes aren't meant for the US or Europe but for China and the Islamic World; no body else is a physical invasion threat to the Rodina.

You make a good argument Housecarl. We aren't much of a threat anymore....
 

Possible Impact

TB Fanatic
logo.png


Russian President Vladimir Putin
Skips Washington Nuclear Summit



01.04.2016
Peter KORZUN
http://www.strategic-culture.org/ne...resident-skips-washington-nuclear-summit.html

Russia, which has the world’s largest nuclear arsenal and a sprawling
military and civilian nuclear industry, has refused to take part in this
week’s nuclear security summit in Washington over the lack of
cooperation with partners on this issue
, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry
Peskov said on March 30 – the day before the top level meeting kicks off
on March 31.


«The nuclear security issue is rather topical. At the same time Moscow
considers that working on issues linked to nuclear security demands
common and joint efforts and mutually taking into account interests and
positions»,
the spokesman told reporters.

«We faced a certain lack of cooperation during the preliminary stage of
working on issues and topics of the summit. That’s why in this case there
is no participation of the Russian side»
,
he explained.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said as far back
as January that the summits interfered with international organizations
like the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN’s nuclear watchdog,
and imposed on them the «opinions of a limited group of states».

That decision followed Russia’s announcement in early 2015 formally
ending its participation in the two-decade-old US-funded Cooperative
Threat Reduction Program to scrap unneeded nuclear weapon systems
and secure facilities where radiological material was stored.

The program included the presence of US elected officials visiting
restricted or formerly closed for access research and military facilities.
Russia said it needed no outside help in handling the problem.

These events take place against certain background, which provides clue
to Russia’s decision to refocus its non-proliferation efforts away from the
US-sponsored events. This is also the time when there has been severe
deterioration of the security situation in the world.

Actually, the scope of the threat is daunting. The world’s military and
civilian nuclear programs have produced some 500 metric tons of pure
plutonium
, amount that could fuel tens of thousands of nuclear weapons
yet fit into a backyard shed.


Countries with nuclear programs continue to add roughly 2 tons to this
inventory every year.

It doesn’t take much to unleash a catastrophe: a grapefruit-sized bit of
plutonium is enough to build a nuclear bomb.

This is also the time when Russia and the leading powers of the West are
divided by deep differences that exclude finding a consensus on the ways
to counter the contemporary challenges to the non-proliferation regime.

The Middle East participants, especially Egypt, are deeply disappointed
by the lack of any progress on making Israel join the NPT and on
establishing a WMD-free zone in the Middle East. Egypt’s position was
supported by Russia. The 2015 Review Conference of the Parties to the
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) failed to
produce an outcome including the implementation of the 1995 resolution
on the creation of a zone free of nuclear weapons and all other weapons
of mass destruction (NWFZ), as well as related delivery vehicles in the
region.

Signed back in 1996, it has yet to enter into force as eight specific
states, including the US, have not ratified the treaty yet.

There are also growing tensions in East Asia, including North Korea
accelerating its nuclear program.

European security is weakened by Russia-NATO stand-off while the
measures that might include nuclear-weapons-free zones and other
steps to prevent nuclear weapons being stationed outside the borders of
the nuclear-weapon states do not top the agenda. There is no accord
between Russian and NATO on nuclear incidents prevention.

Another pressing issue is also not addressed at the US-organized nuclear
summits – the interrelation between offensive and defensive strategic
weapons, as well as the connection between nuclear weapons and new
types of conventional strategic weapons (global prompt strike weapons).

Despite the obvious urgency of this problem, the US and most Europeans
seem to remain indifferent to it. Multilateral disarmament process is
stymied as demonstrated by many years of stagnation at the Conference
on Disarmament in Geneva with the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban
Treaty (CTBT) by which states agree to ban all nuclear explosions in all
environments, for military or civilian purposes.

Talking about arms control, it should be noted that Russia and the US
differ substantially on the issue of compliance with arms control and
nuclear arms reduction agreements. It is highly unlikely that the two
counties would agree to further nuclear cuts below the ceilings agreed
upon in the START-3 treaty. Virtually all negotiating tracks on arms
control have been stalled with existing treaties eroded.

There is another problem, which evokes Russia’s concern that the
summit will hardly help to tackle. The US and its NATO allies are
undermining the NPT by pursuing the «nuclear sharing»
policy.


As part of this policy, military personnel of allied countries without
nuclear weapons of their own are taught to use nuclear weapons
and participate in nuclear planning.


The Obama administration is implementing the Life Extension Program
(LEP) for the B61 tactical nuclear bombs that will extend their life by
20 to 30 years at the estimated cost of $8 billion.

The first complete B61-12 (a brand new guided modification of the
bomb)
is scheduled for 2020. The US plans to equip all F-35s in Europe
with nuclear capability by 2024.

Currently around 200 B61 bombs are deployed in underground
vaults inside around 90 protective aircraft shelters at six bases
in five NATO countries (Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands,
and Turkey).


About half of the munitions are earmarked for delivery
by the national aircraft of these non-nuclear states
,
although they all are parties to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
of 1968 that envisions certain obligations.


For instance, Article I of the NPT prohibits the transfer of nuclear
weapons from nuclear-weapons states to other states:

«Each nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to
transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear
explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices».


Article II requires non-nuclear weapons states not to receive nuclear
weapons: «Each non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty
undertakes not to receive the transfer from any transfer or whatsoever
of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or of control over
such weapons or explosive devices».


These bans are being fully ignored in the course of NATO's
«joint nuclear missions», as part of which pilots from
the alliance's non-nuclear member countries are learning
how to manage and use nuclear weapons.



Russia is inevitably a player in most nonproliferation issues by virtue
of its many roles: as one of three NPT depositary governments, a leading
member of the IAEA board, a permanent member of the UN Security
Council.

Few nonproliferation problems can be resolved without Moscow’s active
support or at least acquiescence. It would be relevant to remember that
Russia is the only reactor supplier willing to take back plutonium-bearing
spent fuel to its territory, something that is good both for nonproliferation
and for Rosatom’s sales pitch (because returning the spent fuel to
Russia eliminates the burden of storing it for prospective customers).

Russia plays a crucial role in implementing the Iranian nuclear deal,
including by accepting regular shipments of Iranian enriched uranium
and leading the conversion of the Fordow uranium enrichment facility
into a nuclear research center.

Moscow also has a key role in both preventing the Islamic State from
acquiring mustard gas and tackling the problem of North Korea’s nuclear
program.

The United States and Russia are founders and co-chairs of the Global
Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism, a voluntary, multilateral partnership
of 86 countries dedicated to strengthening the capacity of its members
to prevent, detect, and respond to acts of nuclear terrorism.

It has sponsored more than 70 multilateral activities in such areas
as nuclear detection, forensics, and response and mitigation.

Without Russia, Washington nuclear summit is doomed to failure.

It makes no sense to discuss the issues of global importance in absence
of a country, which belongs to the key actors’ group. No doubt, Moscow
will tackle the problems of non-proliferation at other forums, like IAEA
(International Atomic Energy Agency) conferences and UN General
Assembly meetings. At that the Russian government believes it makes
no sense to participate in the events staged by the United States.

 
Top